[147092] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: bgp update destroying transit on redback routers ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rob Shakir)
Fri Dec 2 02:56:27 2011
From: Rob Shakir <rjs@rob.sh>
In-Reply-To: <B532EA73-026A-4ADD-93BC-9DB100E2BF97@kumari.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 07:55:29 +0000
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 1 Dec 2011, at 23:04, Warren Kumari wrote:
> tp://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-idr-as0-01 has been replaced =
with http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-as0-00 -- which does =
include it.
Whilst we are on the subject of relevant drafts - it should be noted =
that situations like this provide significant motivation for the work =
presented in both [0] and [1] (full disclosure: I am the editor of [0]). =
I'd really encourage the community to review both documents and comment =
on whether they provide benefit in this problem space. I'm very happy =
to take feedback on the requirements draft [0] particularly - since this =
aimed to describe this problem from an operator perspective.
Essentially, until something is done in a more general sense in the =
protocol, we will continue to see threads liked this one popping up =
every few months.
I'll post a further update to the nanog list when we have requested a =
working group last-call on the requirements draft asking for reviews.
Thanks for your time,
r.
[0]: =
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-grow-ops-reqs-for-bgp-error-handling=
-02
[1]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-00
